An Open Letter to Mitt Romney From a Black Mormon Man: The Continuing Suspicion and Racial Fears of a Mormon Presidency

With the fast approaching 2012 elections on the horizon, there is one question left unanswered. As a widely circulated Associated Press article asked, “Will Obama’s Blackness Prevail Over Romney’s Mormonism in 2012?,” it went on to point out the unique and historical pairing of President Barack Obama, an African American, and Mitt Romney, a Mormon, who represent two oppressed groups in American society on opposite ends of the political divide as the two run for the highest office in the land. The article, however, went one step further and posed a second, equally challenging supposition—how much progress has been made against race-based discrimination? With two weeks to go before the presidential election, neither President Obama nor Governor Romney have used much personal fodder to attack the other, which is astounding given our inclination in American politics to severely trash the other candidate’s more exploitable areas. In this case, one would have guessed that the Obama camp would have by now unleashed on Mitt’s Mormonism and its racist past just as Reverend O’Neal Dozier told the Palm Beach Post, “If Romney is the nominee, President Obama’s surrogates will bring out [the] racist views in the Mormon Church.” In fact, to his credit, President Obama has steered clear of the topic all together, leaving it to others to examine. And yet, the American press has been hushed on the topic.

Interestingly, despite the constitution stating that there shall be no religious test to hold public office (United States Constitution, Article VI, paragraph 3), President Obama was subjected to months of religious attacks prior to the 2008 election; accusations that still go on presently. But the national media has neglected to discuss Mitt Romney’s Mormon ties coupled with LDS racial folklore. Although I respect the regard given to our First Amendment and the separation of church and state, it leaves me wondering—is this a form of white privilege manifesting through our national elections or are republicans simply cherry-picking topics, peculiarly when this issue was addressed in republican primaries and has since been quietly shelved? (I would argue that they are one in the same.) But the American people have a right to know the totality of the character of the American president.

*

The Church’s racial past and present is a prime target for political attacks. On the verge of potentially winning the election, negative attention around the contentious subject of American racism would likely bring unwanted scrutiny to Romney’s political ambitions, particularly when, if successful, he will become the first white man to unseat the nation’s first black president. In January 2012, African-American analyst, Obery M. Hendricks, Jr. wrote an online paper titled “Mitt Romney and the Curse of Blackness” in which he gave his own interpretations to the Book of Mormon. Pointing to the candidate’s LDS beliefs, he found it “deeply troubling” that the Book of Mormon “says…explicitly and in numerous passages [that] black people are cursed by God and our dark skin is the evidence of our accursedness” (pointing in particular to 2 Nephi 5:21; 1 Nephi 12:23; Jacob 3:8; and Alma 3:6). Hendricks is pointing out historical racial metaphors of white=good and black=evil, which symbolism is evidenced in the visceral hatred that many white Americans have at the presence of a black man in White House. Is this perhaps the reason why the history of Mormonism’s experience with Blacks has been convincingly ignored by mainstream American media? Hendricks further remarked, “What makes this all the more problematic …is that at no time has Mitt Romney ever publically indicated that he seriously questioned the divine inspiration of the Book of Mormon’s teachings about race, much less that he has repudiated them.”

Despite LDS claims as the “one true” church with a universalizing message, these are serious charges in which Romney has remained remarkably silent—not breaking free from his religious convictions, yet not offering any consolation with regards to the teachings of his faith that could provide a glimpse into his own racial beliefs, expressly his thoughts about black people. Virtually nothing has been said about his record on civil and social justice, including during his tenure as Governor of Massachusetts. Instead, what we often hear from the mouth of Mitt Romney on matters of race is a reference to what his father accomplished as the great social liberal that he appeared to be. Former Governor George Romney was something special—a white Mormon man with an outward public passion for social justice; something you don’t see everyday, particularly in the 1960’s. George Romney was a social liberal that fought for civil rights, often at odds with racist church leaders determined to alter his course . In 1967, as the elder Romney prepared for his own presidential bid, Jet Magazine picked up on a story where Romney stated, “he would leave the church if it ever tried to prevent him from working for the elimination of social injustices and racial discrimination.” Whether he would ever really have left the Church or not since, by all accounts, he was deeply devoted to the Church and its leadership, Romney took the time to seek the council of high-ranking church leaders on matters of race prior to his run for Governor of Michigan.

Mitt Romney’s efforts at instituting something similar to “Obamacare” in his state is, likewise, commendable; however, he cannot continue to avoid the difficult question that many Americans have a right to know, especially if Romney holds similar views as past Mormon leaders who believe Blacks are a cursed race. Mitt Romney and other Mormons today, just like his father did in the 60’s, continue to hear and receive negative messages about the character and disposition of people of African descent, despite the Church changing its official stance on race in 1978. Yet, I do not believe that Mitt Romney is a closet racist. I do believe, however, that he has deep-seated ideas in his head about black folk like most white Americans, particularly those who attend racially segregated churches like the Mormon Church. How could this not be? For most of our history—246 years of slavery followed by 90 years of Jim Crow, about 85 percent of our existence as a nation—we have struggled to truly come to grips with the meaning of freedom and equality, although we use these terms loosely and romantically. Racist images, ideas, notions and inclinations to discriminate (white racial frames) have spanned 20 generations of American life, and white Christianity has been a central fulcrum to justify unjust white enrichment remaining an anathema for black folks. In order to unlearn racism, one has to do serious work, taking a hard look at oneself and the benefits received from unjust enrichment. It has only been 34 years since church headquarters lifted the Mormon priesthood ban that barred black men from holding the priesthood and denied black women temple marriages, hardly enough time to unlearn an entire generation of white racist thinking and understanding about black people, especially given church headquarters has yet to offer up any rational explanation why such a ban existed in the first place. Instead, what is typically articulated from white Mormons and “bright” Mormons (socially-white people of color) for that matter when questions of race arise in the public domain is, “only the Lord knows why Blacks could not hold the priesthood.” Thus, we have an idea where the Church stands today. And further, we know where George Romney stood. But what we all want to know is, what is your position, Mitt?

21 Comments

Oct24

Julie Cross

If the Mormon Church was or is racist then why have there been called Japanese, European German, Nigerian, Filipino, Portuguese, Mexican, Uruguay, Canadian Chilean Argentine men to serve in the First Quorum of the Seventy…. The Mormon Church is far from racist……

Very interesting article. I totally agree with your assessment of Mitt Romney re race. I think the Republicans put him against President Obama just for racial reasons. Why else would they say they will hold their nose and vote for him. Romney tried to annilate Obama in that 1st presidential debate. Talking down to Obama and calling him “boy.” What does Mormonism teach re lying and by any means necessary. The King James Bible says, “For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul? (Matthew 16:26) Mitt Romney is not his father. Mitt Romney has 30+ years denouncing “blacks” as evil and it is rooted and grounded in his DNA.

“Thus, we have an idea where the Church stands today. And further, we know where George Romney stood. But what we all want to know is, what is your position, Mitt?”

Amen, Darron! That is surely the right question!

As a twice-excommunicated Mormon of Mormon Pioneer stock, my conflict with the Mormon Church began in summer 1965 when I prayed to God to answer my most burning question, which I’d studied for years without finding a satisfactory answer: “What is it that lies behind this policy toward the Negro race?”

It was a precisely worded question and I received a precisely worded answer on the morning of July 25, 1965, which I wrote down and took to priesthood meeting that Sunday morning. And so my personal conflict with the institution began when the young, newly installed bishop (in his early 30s as I was then)dismissed my experience out of hand. “Bishop”, I had said, “something happened to me this morning. If it’s true someone ought to know about it. If it’s not true I need to know about it. Please help me understand.”

Because I would not allow my plea to go unmet, I soon found myself in conflict with the hierarchy. And, because I believed (as taught by the Church re the example of the Adam and Eve story about learning to choose which is the higher law when confronted with conflicting laws or ‘commandments’) that personal conscience always trumps institutional conscience as one’s ultimate personal authority, the institution excommunicated me.

I believe George Romney would have left the Church if it had attempted to control his personal conscience. I’m not at all sure Mitt would.

I am a caucasion Mormon and I love my brothers and sisters of all shades. Just because one person has more or less pigmant than another doesn’t make them better or worse than someone else.

The “skin of blackness” you referenced in the Book of Mormon is in the Bible as well. It is a Hebrew idiom meaning gloom. For example in Job 30:30 Job said, “My skin is black upon me”. You can read or listen to more about what this means at BlacksintheScriptures.com.

We are not a segregated church. We are all one in the body of Christ and we all meet together and have the same priviledges. It is true that from the time Joseph Smith was killed until 1978 blacks were denied the priesthood and temple blessings. That policy went against our own canon of scripture. For example D&C36 states that ALL MEN who desire to preach the gospel should be ordained (receive the priesthood).

My theory of why this happened is that in the 1800’s the LDS church was filled with people who’s thinking was tainted already by what they’d heard over pulpits and other places before they joined this church. So although Joseph Smith had given the priesthood to black men, after he died there were more slave owners joining the church and other influences that degraded the people’s understanding of the scriptures.

So it was and still is a misinterpretation of the Book of Mormon to think that people’s literal skin color turned white or black as they became wicked or righteous.

When will the LDS leadership denounce this as a “false teaching” instead of inspired by a discriminating God? But, then, it would show that prophets were incorrect in their guidance of the church, and their followers praying to know the truth were also wrong.

The LDS prophets claimed to be God’s only mouthpiece on earth, and their words were directly from the almighty

the facts are that these teachings were believed to be god’s command until 1978, when all of a sudden god changed his mind and decided blacks could now have equal blessings to whites.

This stigma will remain until the LDS church admits they have always been wrong on how they have treated blacks…and yes; Romney had a choice…his choice was to sustain this belief

You want an official church statement? It’s been given. I post it here in its entirety without any commentary from me:
Official Statement February 2012
The Church and Race: “All Are Alike Unto God”

The gospel of Jesus Christ is for everyone. The Book of Mormon states, “black and white, bond and free, male and female; … all are alike unto God” (2 Nephi 26:33). This is the Church’s official teaching.

People of all races have always been welcomed and baptized into the Church since its beginning. In fact, by the end of his life in 1844 Joseph Smith, the founding prophet of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, opposed slavery. During this time some black males were ordained to the priesthood. At some point the Church stopped ordaining male members of African descent, although there were a few exceptions. It is not known precisely why, how or when this restriction began in the Church, but it has ended. Church leaders sought divine guidance regarding the issue and more than three decades ago extended the priesthood to all worthy male members. The Church immediately began ordaining members to priesthood offices wherever they attended throughout the world.

The Church unequivocally condemns racism, including any and all past racism by individuals both inside and outside the Church. In 2006, then Church president Gordon B. Hinckley declared that “no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ. Nor can he consider himself to be in harmony with the teachings of the Church. Let us all recognize that each of us is a son or daughter of our Father in Heaven, who loves all of His children.”

Recently, the Church has also made the following statement on this subject: “The origins of priesthood availability are not entirely clear. Some explanations with respect to this matter were made in the absence of direct revelation and references to these explanations are sometimes cited in publications. These previous personal statements do not represent Church doctrine.”

I love that the LDS church needs to answer, but not christianity in general. Sure the church prides itself on knowing the prophets speak to God, but don’t forget that prophets are still human. Just like the bible, God’s words can be misinterpreted. Mormons for years and years never agreed with racism. If we hold the church accountable for racism, then hold anyone who’s christian accountable. After all, christians are the ones that started slavery, and murdered innocent indians all in the name of God.

Trexton Burke: “After all, christians are the ones that STARTED slavery…”
Sorry, I have to disagree with you here. The history of slavery goes back thousands of years before there were Christians. From Exodus 2:23 Israelites were enslaved by the Egyptians and “their cry for help because of their bondage rose up to God! Then in Exodus 21 the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob gave just laws, yes just laws concerning slaves. God/YHVH reminded the Israelites that “If a man kidnaps any of his brothers, fellow members of the community of Isra’el, and makes him his slave or sells him, that kidnapper must die; in this way you will put an end to such wickedness among you.” Deuteronomy 24.

Originally, God/YHVH intended that slaves were to be treated similarly to hired servants with respect or even as family members!

This ban on men of black skin color from the priesthood was not the only ban on these people. No person of black skin could enter the mormon temple to receive god’s blessings.

Mormon doctrine teaches that to receive God’s complete and ultimate blessing, a person must be worthy of entering the temple, performing ordinances, and being sealed for time and eternity as a husband/wife and family. This must be done to achieve the highest level of Mormon heavens.

If one does not go through this process, they are relegated to a lower heaven.

Prior to 1978, due to skin color; regardless of how well one of these black people led their life and even if they followed all the mormon doctrine to the letter, and were in fact leading better lives in the doctrines than all those with white skins; they could not enter the temple with their families to be sealed for time and eternity.

Male black priests could enter, non-black women could enter, non-black boys could enter and non-black girls could enter the temple to receive God’s full blessings.

Have you ever thought to yourself; “I sure wish we didn’t have this doctrine”, or “I sure wish I didn’t have to try and defend this as being God’s command”.

I sincerely pray that one day the mormon leadership humbles themselves and denounces the doctrine. It will be a tremendous burden off the backs of so many who try to defend this as right, and it will lead down the road of freedom

Trexon; no offense taken on your “bigoted” comment. the Bigots were those self-professed Christians who didn’t follow Christ’s teachings on all people being equal in the eyes of God. The difference with the mormon Church is that the prophet per church doctrine is speaking for God. This continues to be stated on LDS.org. It also states that if you follow the prophet you will never be led wrongly.

JOYCE..it is most interesting that the LDS church made this statement of now stating that the reason for the ban on blacks is not clear in an election years. Now we are supposed to believe that no one knew why blacks were being discriminated command against for all those years other than the prophets said this was God’s, and they followed the prophets command

with all that said, I am very grateful that today the LDS church is accepting “all” reces as God has always commanded.

“Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.”
-Bruce R McKonkie in August of 1978 (mid-term election year)

Really amazing!
Does it matter where M.Romney belongs, if he is unintelligent? Another George W.Bush.
He doesn’t know Geography. Where is Mali situated? This knowledge is unimportant for an American president? His speaks of Russia in terms of cold war.
Obama was witty enough in his remark that there are less horses in the U.S. army than 100 years ago.
I wonder, how he could be running for presidency. It’s a disgrace.

Well said Darron, I’ve been asking this question for over a year but I doubt we’ll ever get sufficient answers. As a black man I am not offended by the former or current beliefs of the Mormon Church, I find it offensive that blacks would want to be a part of it in the first place but they readily accepted Christianity so I guess it was inevitable. As far as Mitt Romney is concerned, he is NOT his father but for the next couple of weeks he’ll continue to refer to his father to distract from his own lack of progression.

Please! Enough with the racist talk. Race is not an issue in this election or any election. If black people would forget their skin color, white people would too. This election is about what is best for the country. I don’t believe Romney has any dislike for black people. That is just silly. It seems to me that it is black people who want to keep stirring the pot, and making their skin color such a big deal. Who cares?

I cannot imagine what Romney or his staff could possibly write that would both fulfill your demands, Darron, and gain him ANY votes. I’m sure that Romney’s camp wouldn’t want to touch it because it would simply bring the issue more into the limelight. It wouldn’t be smart politics. Darron, is there anything that Romney could say at this point (even if you think he never would) that would cause you to switch votes?”

it would be absolute political suicide for Romney to state his sustaining of LDS doctrine prior to 1978. His only recourse would be to state that the doctrine on excluding blacks was categorically false; but that would then separate him from his church. A kind of catch 22 here; that he will have to remain silent about

This and other articles I’ve read by Darron Smith make me sad. I’m a caucasion mother of the most amazing black children. I am also LDS. I am not a racist but the more I read the things Darron writes the more I believe it is Darron who has racist views and feelings.

I heard Darron speak a few years ago and talked to him afterward. I challenged him on a couple of the things he said with facts. When he couldn’t rebut the facts I gave him and they showed him to be the racist and not the caucasions he had claimed were racists by the actions he’d listed–I pointed out he was making statements purely out of anger. The only response he gave was “Can you blame me?”

Darron, maybe not. Maybe I can’t blame you since I have not lived my life in your circumstances. I can only tell you that YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS IN OTHER PEOPLE’S HEARTS! You may claim to, but you don’t. I understand you are feeling hurt by the world but not every white person has racist feelings about every black person or any other person of color. It just isn’t so. To quote Elder Uchtdorf, “STOP IT!” Please stop it. Don’t write about things you don’t know. You are not and cannot be an expert on people’s hearts–only on your own. And it feels very much like you are very, very angry–maybe too angry to be writing or speaking on this topic. You are doing yourself and everyone a disservice.

@Janna Galley
Unfortunately this country was built on the bastion of white supremacy. Why dont you walk a mile in our shoe and you’ll see our country in a totally different way. Our nation is reaping what it sowned a long time ago. If Dr. Darron’s articles disturb you then dont read them.